Parking fine assistance (yay!)
Discussion
Xjay - take it from someone who has been to the small claims court and won (albeit with Excel parking), that it is nothing to be concerned about if it does go that far. It's very informal and not daunting in the slightest.
What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
Sargeant Orange said:
Xjay - take it from someone who has been to the small claims court and won (albeit with Excel parking), that it is nothing to be concerned about if it does go that far. It's very informal and not daunting in the slightest.
What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
thanks for the advice, that's good to hear.What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
I'm not overly worried if it went to that state, but I hope it wouldn't. it's not in their interest nor mine.
I think i have the main point which is the failure to invite keeper to name driver, so failed on POFA2012. that's without getting information from signage etc. worst case i would ask online if anyone lives near to birmingham who can get signage details for me.
i do appreciate the advice from some posters helping me. i freely admit i am too retarded to trawl through the ins and outs.
if it DID go to court if driver was not the keeper , would the keeper have to go, or could the driver attend?
regarding the letter, i sent two , one to ECP and one to DRP , haven't heard back from DRP as of yet , only ECP.
Just a quick update
NCP replied back with a letter basically saying that there is nothing they can do, and to deal with the collection agency.
Subsequently, I received another exact copy of the same letter from DRP.
I will just send another copy of exactly the same letter back to DRP, unless someone has better advice.
NCP replied back with a letter basically saying that there is nothing they can do, and to deal with the collection agency.
Subsequently, I received another exact copy of the same letter from DRP.
I will just send another copy of exactly the same letter back to DRP, unless someone has better advice.
xjay
Just send itback to DRP saying the cdebt is denied and they should go back to the person ECP
Should you get futehr letters after telling them not to contact you , i understand you could send them a 'any more and you will reported for harassment' letter
After all they are just the equivalant of me being asked by you to go and see X to get they money you think you are owed. No legal standing whatsoever
Debt Collectors... oiks who intimidate people into paying.
Court Baliffs.. different kettle of fish.. full force of law behind them and treat with kid gloves
Just send itback to DRP saying the cdebt is denied and they should go back to the person ECP
Should you get futehr letters after telling them not to contact you , i understand you could send them a 'any more and you will reported for harassment' letter
After all they are just the equivalant of me being asked by you to go and see X to get they money you think you are owed. No legal standing whatsoever
Debt Collectors... oiks who intimidate people into paying.
Court Baliffs.. different kettle of fish.. full force of law behind them and treat with kid gloves
Hi silverfox
i will,
My previous letter was as below:
"I am writing to you with regards to the above case.
The debt is denied for the following reason
- You have failed to comply with The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, Section 9 (2) (e) of the Act. You have failed to give the invitation prescribed therefore within.
- Anti-Spam functionality on the web mail service for which the appeal response was sent, the response was blocked
I am prepared to engage with your client, ECP, if they are open to discussion.
With this in mind I would respectfully request a re-issue of POPLA code to be sent via post (to address above) and to e-mail (email@address).
Yours sincerely
Registered Keeper <Reg>"
i will,
My previous letter was as below:
"I am writing to you with regards to the above case.
The debt is denied for the following reason
- You have failed to comply with The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, Section 9 (2) (e) of the Act. You have failed to give the invitation prescribed therefore within.
- Anti-Spam functionality on the web mail service for which the appeal response was sent, the response was blocked
I am prepared to engage with your client, ECP, if they are open to discussion.
With this in mind I would respectfully request a re-issue of POPLA code to be sent via post (to address above) and to e-mail (email@address).
Yours sincerely
Registered Keeper <Reg>"
That's pretty much the same as the content of the letters we send to DRP on a regular basis, and generally they either say they can't issue a POPLA code (correct), but they also claim that they can only collect the alleged debt (incorrect - they are acting as agents for ECP, so they can "negotiate" on behalf of the parking company.
It'll go back and forth for a while, with letters becoming further apart in time, but ECP on the M&B sites have no record of enforcing these through court. Keep copies of all correspondence though - they still may try a fishing exercise in a year or two.
It'll go back and forth for a while, with letters becoming further apart in time, but ECP on the M&B sites have no record of enforcing these through court. Keep copies of all correspondence though - they still may try a fishing exercise in a year or two.
PorkInsider said:
I really, really don't know how you can be arsed with this.
You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
That Sir is why these cockroaches of society are still in business. Could you imagine if nobody ever paid up. Everybody appealed and went to court. The government would be forced to act because the small claims system would collapse due to the volume. You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
Now if only these parking enforcement companies had some set of rules to abide by so they could win in court. Oh yes they do, they just choose not to comply and try to bully people in to just paying up. If I ever get one and know I’m in the right or they haven’t complied with the rules and procedures you can guarantee it would be see you in court.
xjay1337 said:
PorkInsider said:
I really, really don't know how you can be arsed with this.
You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
I'm not paying £50 when I overstayed by half an hour, at £1.00 or £1.50 per hour.You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
PorkInsider said:
I really, really don't know how you can be arsed with this.
You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
Porkinsider, you are wrong and this simply proliferates the problem for everyone else. You admitted it was your mistake, they want £50.
I'd have just paid them and got on with my life.
NO DISAGREEMENTS ARE ALLOWED
If you reply to this thread disagreeing with the above then you agree to pay a £100 penalty charge notice. Failure to pay within 28 days will result in the laptop owners details being requested from PH admin. Non payment will result in additional charges which will be added to the charge and for which the post writer will be liable for on an indemnity basis.
Andy20vt said:
Porkinsider, you are wrong and this simply proliferates the problem for everyone else.
NO DISAGREEMENTS ARE ALLOWED
If you reply to this thread disagreeing with the above then you agree to pay a £100 penalty charge notice. Failure to pay within 28 days will result in the laptop owners details being requested from PH admin. Non payment will result in additional charges which will be added to the charge and for which the post writer will be liable for on an indemnity basis.
Don't be so pathetic.NO DISAGREEMENTS ARE ALLOWED
If you reply to this thread disagreeing with the above then you agree to pay a £100 penalty charge notice. Failure to pay within 28 days will result in the laptop owners details being requested from PH admin. Non payment will result in additional charges which will be added to the charge and for which the post writer will be liable for on an indemnity basis.
Disagree by all means but I'm not going to engage with that sort of nonsense.
xjay1337 said:
Sargeant Orange said:
Xjay - take it from someone who has been to the small claims court and won (albeit with Excel parking), that it is nothing to be concerned about if it does go that far. It's very informal and not daunting in the slightest.
What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
thanks for the advice, that's good to hear.What I would say though is that you need to start getting yourself clued up on the regulations and those which are integral to your situation. You can't rely on posters here to do the work for you. If you'd researched your case you wouldn't be asking how to reply to those letters.
Go to pepipoo, look for similar cases to yours and read the threads back to front and understand exactly why ECP have failed to follow the regulations. Once you've done that you'll know what letter is turning up before you even get it.
If it does go in front of a judge you need to get in front of this instead of playing catch up
I'm not overly worried if it went to that state, but I hope it wouldn't. it's not in their interest nor mine.
I think i have the main point which is the failure to invite keeper to name driver, so failed on POFA2012. that's without getting information from signage etc. worst case i would ask online if anyone lives near to birmingham who can get signage details for me.
i do appreciate the advice from some posters helping me. i freely admit i am too retarded to trawl through the ins and outs.
if it DID go to court if driver was not the keeper , would the keeper have to go, or could the driver attend?
regarding the letter, i sent two , one to ECP and one to DRP , haven't heard back from DRP as of yet , only ECP.
Nothing to stop you attending but you will merely be an onlooker as you will not be the relevant party in the case.
* If so, I hope when corresponding with the PPC you used the RK's name and not yours to sign off on it.
Little details like that can be important. County Court judges can be unpredictable compared with those further up the food chain.
Some are still not totally clued up on PoFA 2012 and Schedule 4.
Red Devil said:
If, as I assume from your posts, the driver has not been named* the defendant will be the RK, not you.
Nothing to stop you attending but you will merely be an onlooker as you will not be the relevant party in the case.
* If so, I hope when corresponding with the PPC you used the RK's name and not yours to sign off on it.
Little details like that can be important. County Court judges can be unpredictable compared with those further up the food chain.
Some are still not totally clued up on PoFA 2012 and Schedule 4.
Yes I have always been using phrases like Registered keeper / driver.Nothing to stop you attending but you will merely be an onlooker as you will not be the relevant party in the case.
* If so, I hope when corresponding with the PPC you used the RK's name and not yours to sign off on it.
Little details like that can be important. County Court judges can be unpredictable compared with those further up the food chain.
Some are still not totally clued up on PoFA 2012 and Schedule 4.
Updates
Letters coming back from Zenith now.
It has a big black box staing "INTENTION TO COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS".
Then it goes to state that it will be "passed to their legal team with the recommendation to start legal proceedings to recover the debt"
So seems to be another scare-mail
I will send them the letter back again stating the debt is denied.
Letters coming back from Zenith now.
It has a big black box staing "INTENTION TO COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS".
Then it goes to state that it will be "passed to their legal team with the recommendation to start legal proceedings to recover the debt"
So seems to be another scare-mail
I will send them the letter back again stating the debt is denied.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff